‘Blame Mike’ – absurdity and appeal of Tyson v Paul
If ever there was an example to perfectly illustrate the absurdity of Friday’s Mike Tyson vs Jake Paul fight, it is this:
On 17 January 1997, the Paul family in Ohio were celebrating the birth of blond-haired baby boy Jake.
Meanwhile, the cover of that month’s edition of the International Boxing Digest asked: “Is Tyson finished?”
‘Iron Mike’ was already past his prime – having been dismantled inside 11 rounds by Evander Holyfield two months earlier – but to answer the question, no, he was not finished.
Twenty-seven years later, Jake has grown into the self-proclaimed ‘Problem Child’ and faces a 58-year-old Tyson at Dallas’ AT&T Stadium.
‘What rooster?’ – How a YouTuber became a stadium sports star
Tyson and Paul will wear bigger gloves and contest shorter two-minute rounds in a contest which has, curiously, been sanctioned as a professional bout.
Organisers say it is not a gimmick, while the inclusion to the card of Katie Taylor v Amanda Serrano – after their all-time classic in 2022 – adds credibility.
Critics argue the richest and most competitive fight in the female code should not be playing second fiddle to the Tyson-Paul carnival.
Yet the interest is undeniable, so much so that it convinced streaming powerhouse Netflix to broadcast the event live to a global subscriber list of 280 million.
A crowd of about 70,000 is expected at the stadium.
With boxing’s already fragile reputation being tested, will Tyson and Paul treat this as a ‘real’ fight? Should it even be happening? And what does the Netflix deal bring?